Kodak Portra (introduced 1998) and Kodak Gold (introduced 1988) are two of the most popular colour negative films from Kodak, but what really is the difference between them (other than the staggering price difference)? At $16.95 per roll of 36, Gold stands out as being one of the most budget-friendly colour films on the market and has been a long-time favourite of both casual shooters and professionals. Portra 160 on the other hand is $27.95 for a roll of 36, and is part of Kodak’s professional grade of films, specifically designed for portrait photography. I have shot both but had never done a proper side-by-side comparison. Until now.
For this comparison I shot on two different cameras, a Canon AE-1 and a Canon Elan IIe, both with 50mm lenses. I got the two rolls developed using Mr. Consistent with Flic Film chemicals and I scanned them myself at the store with an Epson V850 Pro flatbed scanner. I always scan my colour negative film as positive tiff files and then convert them in Lightroom with Negative Lab Pro, I have found it gives me great tones and a good degree of colour correcting ability. For this comparison to have the most level playing field, I did no colour correcting, just converted the images and white balanced off of the black border.
Gold offers vibrant colours and a noticeable warmth that adds a nostalgic feel to images. The ISO 200 rating strikes a balance between grain and sensitivity, making it good for shooting in various lighting conditions, although it performs best in well-lit environments. Its colour rendition leans towards the saturated side, which can enhance the natural hues of landscapes and skin tones. In daylight, it will bring out the reds and enhance the blues to make a startling image that’s just a little more real than real. Before this comparison I would not have called myself the biggest Gold fan, but looking at the photos side by side I have to say I prefer Gold in almost every one.
On the other hand, Kodak Portra 160 is known for its exceptional quality and finer grain, making it a favourite among professional photographers, especially for portraiture. The film is designed to produce natural and soft skin tones, which are essential for capturing professional-grade portraits. With an ISO of 160, it offers lower sensitivity than Gold 200, necessitating carefully crafted lighting conditions, but it will definitely shine on sunny days or with the addition of lighting equipment. Initially looking at the images uncropped I don’t notice much of a difference in grain structure, but zoomed in there is slightly finer detail in the Portra images and the smaller grain is noticeable in the sky areas.
As someone who has shot Portra many times (mainly 400 but I have also used 160 and 800) I was quite surprised how green and blue these images look, especially compared to the Gold. Usually when scanning and converting I do some colour correction for the entire roll, mainly to get the white balance correct, which I didn’t do this time. I went back and did some basic colour correcting on the street corner image and it looks much more like what I would expect from Portra. The colour corrected version of that image probably has my favourite tones of the three, although if I had to pick before adjusting I definitely like the Gold better. I do also find that the Portra definitely leans towards red in the images in bright sun, especially in the white highlights. In the cropped image of the snow on the mountain top above, the greens are quite accurate in the trees while the sky and snow have much more of a red tint.
The choice between Kodak Gold 200 and Kodak Portra 160 ultimately depends on your specific needs and shooting configurations. I would say after this, I am much more likely to grab Gold when wanting a low ISO colour film. I think it performed better as a warm-tone film, especially for it being a consumer-grade much more affordable option. I definitely won’t be done with Portra forever, but I will likely stick to 400. I’m already planning another comparison since I found this to be a very helpful experiment, so would love to hear what film stocks you would like to see side by side next!
